1. We have added the ability to collapse/expand forum categories and widgets on forum home.
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Photobucket has changed its policy concerning hotlinking images and now requires an account with a $399.00 annual fee to allow hotlink. More information is available at: this link.
    Dismiss Notice
  3. All Civ avatars are brought back and available for selection in the Avatar Gallery! There are 945 avatars total.
    Dismiss Notice
  4. To make the site more secure, we have installed SSL certificates and enabled HTTPS for both the main site and forums.
    Dismiss Notice
  5. Civ6 is released! Order now! (Amazon US | Amazon UK | Amazon CA | Amazon DE | Amazon FR)
    Dismiss Notice
  6. Dismiss Notice
  7. Forum account upgrades are available for ad-free browsing.
    Dismiss Notice

This IS a Conservative C2C MP game Thunderbrd! :p

Discussion in 'Multiplayer and LP's' started by JosEPh_II, Feb 6, 2017.

  1. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    I will be initially posting screen shots.

    The 1st 2 will be 2 Map choices plus the initial (top of list) Option choices. Then followed by continuing down the Options list by page. The 1st 2 will also show Victory conditions.

    So here are the 1st 2 screenshots: Civ4ScreenShot0004.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0010.JPG
    The 1st Screenshot is using PM Map set to Huge but Large is also a viable choice. This map consistently gives fairly decent starting positions. Huge or Large dependent upon # of Players that start the game. With 4-6 players Large is sufficient.

    2nd Screen shot is Islands Map. This one would restrict very early, early game meeting of neighbors. Set to Huge with several extra large islands and many tiny islands exploration by water is a viable once appropriate naval tech is researched. This map will dictate heavy navy usage as the game progresses. Again size can be lowered to Large dependent upon # of Players.

    Now for the rest of the Set Up Options List:

    Civ4ScreenShot0005.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0006.JPG
    In the Above shot Advanced Economy and/or Realistic Culture Spread are open for debate(s) for inclusion.
    Civ4ScreenShot0007.JPG
    Leaders will be restricted to 2 Positive Traits by checking the No Negative Traits box.

    Civ4ScreenShot0008.JPG
    Here the Option Upscaled Building and Units Cost is added to restrict (ie slow down) the early game build up of Massive armies. Also XP will not be as easy to build up.

    Civ4ScreenShot0009.JPG
    Neanderthal Cities is also open for debate.

    You will also notice that animals can roam freely. So workers and other non mil units will need protection. Also all animal groups, barbs, and neanderthals (if selected) will "war" upon each other. This will cut down on animals stacked everywhere.

    And for those not familiar with the Option: City starts with 1 tile, this option On means that when you found a city it starts with it's Main City Center Tile. The Culture level Poor must be achieved to pop the next ring of 8 tiles. The Culture point level to achieve Poor is dictated by Game Speed (GS) selected. With Epic GS this is generally 4-6 turns, to achieve a Culture level of 20 for Poor. Leaders usually affect the rate of Culture points/turn.

    If RCS is also chosen then it too will affect the number in the next ring. Whether you pop the adjacent 8 tiles to Main tile or a portion of that 8 dependent upon terrain restrictions RCS uses.

    Finally No Combat Mod Options are used and a more "traditional" BtS Combat Engine will be used. Even so many of T-brd's CM Options do have bleedover into the Main Mod Combat engine in varying degrees.

    So this is the core set up for what "I think" is a Conservative C2C Pbem.

    I await your comments and debates.

    JosEPh
     
    Last edited: Feb 6, 2017
  2. MagnusIlluminus

    MagnusIlluminus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,683
    Location:
    In my own little world...
    If I'm involved with this one, I'd slightly prefer continent(s) to Islands, and Huge size regardless of number of players.

    Realistic Culture Spread is an option I've always used since it appeared, as it makes cultural borders a bit more organic. However, if "City starts with 1 tile" is in play, it could be problematic if the first city were, for example, surrounded by forested hills. It could be interesting to play a game without it for a change.

    It might be a good idea to check on both "More Rivers" and "More Resources" options.

    Aside from those few points, the rest of it looks good.
     
  3. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    I would've chosen Custom Continents but for 1 problem, the lack of tiny islands to help facilitate early game exploration. While Low Sea level aids even Custom C's, it can also lead to an Empire being cut off longer than others from initial neighbor contact. And on Huge with, for example, 6 players for Islands the Islands are approximate in size to the Custom C's size. And there will be several empty Large Islands for later exploitation upon discovery. Exploration will be a must once the end of Preh era is reached. And those "empty Large Islands" will also generate more barbarian activity on them. But CC's is a possibility. I also entertained the idea for an Archipelago map too.

    And as for RCS with 1 City Tile, I've encountered no problem with it that makes it unusable or intolerable. I did much testing with RCS On when I 1st built this Option because of questions and concerns from T-brd and Mrs., plus DH, Blue Genie, and Noriad2. So I'm really flexible to having RCS On in this case. I used to hate RCS years ago because of Fixed Borders and how they interacted.

    JosEPh
     
  4. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    For comparison:
    Custom Continents for 6 players:

    Civ4ScreenShot0014.JPG

    Islands for 8 Players:

    Civ4ScreenShot0015.JPG

    In each World Map look closely at the Mini maps for each. The possibilities, imho, for Islands is much more than what Custom provides.

    JosEPh
     
  5. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    Testing different maps tonight I've come to the conclusion that the game set up Option Reckless Animals must be On. Otherwise with Reckless Off (not checked) grizzly bears just walk on by your gatherer or stone thrower or even you wanderer early game. Not good game play imho.

    T-brd's suggestion for Planet generator Map also has good possibilities if you are not stuck on just having to have an Earth type map. Which is what I prefer as Earth type maps get stale unless you are a Historical re-enactor type player. I'm not anymore.

    JosEPh
     
  6. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    19,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I took some time to analyze the differences in our proposals on this just to see if there was anything I wanted to mention about my thinking and there are a few points to make.

    First of all, I'd like to say that this is, to some extent, officially your challenge to me to play against my usual selections and allow you to play with yours, and the opposite is pretty much true in the inverse. I realize this kinda puts everyone else here someone caught between that so we'll have to bend to some wills here most likely but I think this is really a fun idea.

    I do hope you'll also play the Progressive game as a good sport. You might do better than you think ;) (and it will make for a hell of a comparison between the two games for all of us.)

    So that said, I don't feel I should be trying to sway your options much.

    But I'd like to point out that your proposal will make for a lot of options either being on or off on both that may be preferred by some of the players in the 'middle' here. These options (and this is by no means a perfected and

    Here's my thoughts...
    • No Vassal States: A little surprising that we'd both want this off but I'm totally down with that.
    • No Inquisitions: Really? I thought you liked playing the zealot game? I'm cool with not having it on in this game... just surprised is all.
    • No Barb Civs: I'm a little surprised you would want this off... I like the option as well and if we turned it off in both games then we are introducing the potential for AI civs. IF we do that, we should consider then having perhaps a larger map and an equal number of AI players starting right along with us so as to give us all a little conquering range without having to necessarily go after each other if we want to expand. Something worth discussion. I'd assumed we'd want all AI players completely out if possible but I personally don't mind another approach in either game.
    • Tech Diffusion: So that would be off here but on in the other game while tech TRADING would be on here but off in the other... yeah, that's probably good imo.
    • Unlimited Wonders: It's been stated by some players here that this is an imbalancing option but I'm strongly in favor of it. So I won't fight you here either but with that opinion voiced by others, if we need to have one of these games have it off, this would be the one, wouldn't it? I'd hate to turn it off in the progressive game!
    • No Great Commanders: Been a while since I've had this off. I can certainly work with that.
    • Advanced Economy: off? I thought you were the one who really got in and worked with this option recently? I'm not sure aside from inflation what this actually does so sure I'll play with it off here. I'm just surprised you'd prefer that.
    • Realistic Culture Spread: I thought you liked this option but I guess it would be interesting to play a game with it off to see how it goes.
    • Larger Cities without Metro: This is one you and I obviously both agree on. I feel strongly for this option being on. But I know that Koshling has a strong opinion on having it off and I was hoping this would be the game to have it off if we had to have one of them have it that way.
    • No fixed borders: surprising is all.
    • No Negative Traits. Ok... sure, but then should we also turn on Pure Traits here so that we also do not have any negative effects from any traits? This would make them more like the original game I suppose.
    • Nukes Off: I thought you played with this off? I'm cool with Nukes being a factor in both games though.
    • Upscaled... wow. I thought that was pandering to a very small segment of player appreciation. Could be interesting to play though.

    All in all, I kinda like your proposal hands down. Just a few things that are surprising and a few things I'm concerned some players would thus want from the progressive game as a result of getting or not getting it here.

    I'll start a thread on the other game but this is looking good so far. We'll need to put forward bug option proposals as well.
     
  7. MagnusIlluminus

    MagnusIlluminus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,683
    Location:
    In my own little world...
    Sorry, I was not intending to refer to "Custom Continents" as a map type, but rather to the map type that you have in the first image. In other words, I would slightly prefer Perfect Mongoose 3 over Islands. (I can do naval games, but prefer not to. Not sure why.) We might also try "C2C_World". I made a game with that recently and it seems to be good. I haven't really gotten very far in that game though.

    Yeah, I thought about mentioning "No Nukes" as I generally use that option, but the odds of a game even getting that far seem negligible.
     
  8. Koshling

    Koshling Vorlon

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2011
    Messages:
    8,978
    This is miles away from my natural inclinations, but I'm down for it anyway ;-)
     
  9. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    I too usually do not use this Option either. But left it "On" because the odds of the game ever getting that far in Pbem is very small.

    This is actually an oversight. As I intended that the only AI presence would be the barbs, animals, and neanders with no "new" AI Civs popping up.
    If you want this Option "Off" in the other game, ie not used, then I can leave it On here even though it was an oversight on my part. It would make for a more diverse game, but it could also mean you better be on your toes as the AI can be either a push over and a source of additional cities. Or if not found and conquered early another unpredictable opponent, for awhile anyway. Could even cause human players to "band together for a common cause" for a time.

    This selection restricts ALL leaders to only have 2 traits. Which is more than enough imho and why I selected it. Some of the "Negative" traits on some of the Leaders are real empire building killers.

    Which brings up something not yet discussed, Leader selections. Random? Or Unrestricted? Both?

    Since I always support Multiple Religion Spread No Inquisitions being unchecked is a nono for my style of play. The same goes for Religious Decay being checked. I actually hate that Option. When it started kicking in in the Another MP game it was killing me at the worst possible time.

    If you want RCS On in the Progressive game I'm okay with it Off in this one.

    Thanks! :)

    BUG settings coming up in another post later today. have some errands to run right now.

    JosEPh
     
  10. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    BUG Settings: (all subject to reasonable change except Multiple Religion Spread )

    Civ4ScreenShot0021.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0022.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0024.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0025.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0026.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0027.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0028.JPG Civ4ScreenShot0030.JPG

    Any concerns?

    JosEPh
     
  11. MagnusIlluminus

    MagnusIlluminus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,683
    Location:
    In my own little world...
    Looks good to me.
     
  12. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    19,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Ok.
    I'm thinking I'd like to add as many AI players as we have human players to the other game and then have this be 'off' in the progressive. This will make for a larger combat field that isn't purely PVP, giving players more of an opportunity to test various strategies in a less familiar environment before getting into PVP activities. And it also could give more strategic, rather than tech development, based diplomacy opportunities.

    On Developing Leaders it doesn't matter. On previous games, we randomized. What if we hand selected them here?

    Ok... I definitely want it on in the Progressive. I haven't played with it off in quite some time so it might be interesting to see how it performs. I believe with one tile start, whether you have RCS on or off, you were right that the first rung is always filled out once you reach the second culture level. Just to clarify.

    As for the bug options, looks like our only significant disagreement that isn't entirely user level optional is Dynamic XP and Opportunity Fire. I'm a little surprised both games will be without terrain damage but it would be nice to not worry about it in either one since it's been a big factor in the last two.
     
  13. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    Something for those interested in this game to think about, would you consider a Normal GS game? 1000 turns vs 2000 for Epic? Reason I bring it up, it took us 4 years to get to the middle/late Classical in the Another game ~ 500-600 ish turns on Epic. In 1 years time of averaging a turn done a day on Normal GS we should be approaching Ren Era by that time. I know the tech will come fast and furious but many of us itch to see the mid to late game. I know I do. Thought I'd throw this out. I know this is foreign to most of you. But for a Pbem game this might be a necessary evil.

    Thoughts?

    JosEPh
     
  14. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    19,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    I would be willing to play if you set it at normal because I know it's more your style anyhow. I'm looking forward to being way out of my element. Since Epic now is longer than it was on our last 2 games (by a little) then the progressive definitely needs it to be no faster. But I can see why you'd set this one to norm. I was expecting it actually.
     
  15. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    I'm just concerned over having players not used to long Pbem games adjusting and staying the course. The 4 of us in this conversation have shown it's not a real problem for us though.

    Another alternative if the game stays on Epic is to autorun the 1st 100 turns and then each player take over their Empire.

    Just throwing out ideas here. ;)

    JosEPh
     
  16. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    19,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Really? My favorite part of the game is the very beginning... huh. I'd certainly prefer a normal speed to turning my nation over to AI control during the most critical phase of development.
     
  17. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    Again just some concern about new players. If we get any that is. :p

    So Hydro is out.

    JosEPh
     
  18. JosEPh_II

    JosEPh_II TBS WarLord

    Joined:
    Jun 20, 2007
    Messages:
    12,395
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Western IL. cornfields
    So when do we upload the latest C2C SVN to the game SVN.

    Too bad we've not gotten around to fixing the tech tree for late Classical and the short cut to Med Era thru it. That needs some work.

    JosEPh
     
  19. Thunderbrd

    Thunderbrd C2C War Dog

    Joined:
    Jan 2, 2010
    Messages:
    19,218
    Gender:
    Male
    Location:
    Las Vegas
    Dang unhappy about that too I am. Saddening. Ah well.

    I have one last fix to make that I'm not sure how long will take. We need to have 2 distinctly different mod folders for these games or the bug options will conflict. But it can all be under the same SVN... just include both folders in the one we have. Hopefully no players have any problems with the folder being named other than Caveman2Cosmos as we've seen some systems have on the latest assets.

    I agree wholeheartedly about the late Classical and Med Era!!!

    I'm also not far from being able to start putting my new traits to xml so missing out on them when they are so close to manifestation kinda sucks. Might take longer than I think to get them totally into play though and it'd be nice to make sure they are open tested for a bit before such a commitment. These traits are dang weird though.

    What did you think about hand selecting our nations/leaders this time around btw?
     
  20. MagnusIlluminus

    MagnusIlluminus Chieftain

    Joined:
    Mar 13, 2012
    Messages:
    1,683
    Location:
    In my own little world...
    Even with Developing Leaders, selection can matter (for some people anyway) as it dictates what Native Culture you begin with, and thus how your people & cities appear. Also, which specific Cultures you can later be eligible for. The latter point can be affected if you manage to conquer one or more cities with other base cultures, so it may be of lesser concern. This game is not using Developing Leaders, so it does matter. I'm fine with either selecting (I'll have to think about exactly which one) or random.

    Normal game speed would be interesting. A few versions ago, I did a single player game on Quick (I think) speed, to see if I could get into later eras. It was a riot, what with getting several techs per turn. I have the feeling it crashed and burned when it hit a snag of some sort, but I don't remember quite what. Anyway, Normal would be acceptable.

    I would not want to autorun any turns, as I would expect that an AI would not make the same decisions that I would. Let's not do that please.

    Another concern would be turn order, though that could wait until the list of players is finalized. Based on play patterns I've seen on the other game for the four of us, I'd say that JosEPh & Koshling would be 1st and 2nd slot (probably respectively, as I'm guessing JosEPh will be creating the game itself) with Thunderbrd and myself in 3rd and 4th slots. Not sure who should be 3rd or 4th though. Does it matter for troubleshooting? That is, if there is an error during the AI's turn, would it be easier if Thunderbrd acted right before that?
     

Share This Page